As announced since its express approval in the House of Representatives, the pension reform will face a tough test in the courts, after opposition sectors went from words to actions and, putting aside their complaints, filed the first formal complaint against this law on the grounds that its provisions are contrary to the Constitution.
In an official communication, presented this Thursday, July 18, Representative Oscar Villamizar submitted to the Constitutional Court a 1,200-page document, in which he maintains and demonstrates from his perspective that the reform “contradicts the constitutional and legal precepts indicated in each case, which regulate the legislative procedure for the approval of laws of the Republic, as attached in the document below.”
Providing evidence collected during the pension process in Congresswhich were compared with multiple articles of the Constitution, this claim maintains that its request complies with the principles of clarity, certainty, specificity, relevance and sufficiency required by the Law and therefore they trust that it will come to fruition.
Economic activity in the country grew again in May, although with less force
The first request of the plaintiffs, while due process is carried out, is that the entry into force of the pension reform, which was already sanctioned this week by President Gustavo Petro, be suspended, since if it begins to be implemented, this could lead to serious consequences.
Pension reform sanctioned.
Courtesy – Presidency / API
“Its complexity could cause it to come into effect before completing the constitutional review, which could cause irreversible and serious damage to the entire Colombian population contributing or expecting a pension,” says the lawsuit, which also “requests completion of the review after entry into force.” “retrovert legal acts that are caused as a consequence of the entry into force of the law.”
‘Dark clouds’ over Colombia’s investment climate, according to the State Department
The text also notes that the arguments used to call for the pension reform to be overturned point to the fact that this law violated several norms established in the Colombian Political Constitution, the Regulations of the Congress of the Republic and the rulings of the Constitutional Court that regulate the processing of this type of law.
Thus, according to the representative Oscar Villamizar In their request, the approval of this reform, as it happened, goes against three articles of the Constitution, 10 of Law 5, which sets the rules of the game in Congress, and the principles of publicity and deliberation that are stated in national legislation.
Chats revealed implicating the Ministry of Finance in corruption scandal at UNGRD
“In this context, the pension reform in its “substance” began its discussion on June 13, 2024, formally approving and denying the filing motion proposed by opposition representatives Betsy Pérez and Juan Felipe Corzo and approving the majority motion,” the lawsuit reads.
With all of the above on the table, the lawsuit raises three charges which will be studied by the Constitutional Court to analyze whether they are admissible. The first of them warns that the principle of deliberation was ignored, since despite the opposition asking for time to present its negative report in the discussions of this law, this space was not given, as happened with the request that this article not be voted on as a block.
After surpassing $4,000, the dollar in Colombia expanded its gains this Thursday
“The attack was not due to haste or tight votes, but only to prevent minorities from being able to have their proposals and concerns heard. Returning to the unilateral declaration by the presidency to declare sufficient information when less than 1 hour had passed since the debate on the proposal began, this is manifestly contrary to the law and the principle of deliberation,” they added.
The second charge is more in line with what has been indicated from various sectors and is related to the unexpected move that occurred in the plenary session of the House, where it was surprisingly proposed to approve in block what was voted in the Senate, ignoring the progress that had been made up to that point in this wing of Congress.
“At no time were the reports corresponding to the Senate of the Republic or their texts published in the agenda as a framework for the study of the Bill. This is because the basic text for debate and voting is the one produced by the speakers as delimiters of the debate in accordance with the provisions of Law 5 of 1992,” they explained.
President Gustavo Petro signs and sanctions the pension bill.
EFE
Finally, the lawsuit warns that there is unconstitutionality due to the “falsehood” contained in the proposal approved by the plenary session of the House of Representatives”, since although two principles that do not explicitly govern the legislative process are violated, it does violate two basic aspects of the law, such as “Good Faith and Transparency and Integrity”.
Since the pandemic, there have not been fewer than 10,000 homes sold: in June the figures fell
“Approving a proposal and even considering it when it contains manifestly false information and seeks to correct what cannot be corrected by making the congressmen in error on the part of the proponents and trying to prevent constitutional disputes in a deceitful manner are acts of bad faith,” he added.
Having said all this, the lawsuit seeks to declare the unconstitutionality of Law 2381 of 2024 (pension reform), a situation that will now be studied in detail by the Constitutional Court, while it is already predicted that this discussion will give rise to much debate. in the coming months. This regulation is scheduled to come into force on 1 July 2025.
